Chapter3

//**10 Traits of Highly Effective Teachers**//

**Chapter 3** **Teaching traits that get results: With-it-ness and style** In this chapter, our author states that, "Time spent does not count as academic learning time unless the student is experiencing a 95% success rate." What do you take from this statement that may impact the way you observe teachers? Does this percentage surprise you, and how can it be helpful (or not so helpful.)

Dani Carter- This statement shocks me and really makes me look at myself as a teacher. 95% success rate is daunting. When I am a principal I think this would be an important piece of information to share with my staff mid year. When I am observing teachers I think it is important for me to remember that the whole time might not qualify as academic learning time because the students are not experiencing at 95% success rate. I think it is also important to speak with the teachers to see how they view% success. This could be a topic that could strike up a controversy amongst staff members because some would like data, while others firmly believe they know their students without data.% is such I think this piece of information of have a 95% success rate is helpful to start discussions among staff, but I think it is not helpful for myself as an observer because at first I would not know how to base success.

Katie Kimber: When I read this it surprised me. I think, what does 95% success rate mean? How can you tell when students are experiencing a 95% success rate? What does that look like? And is this the same for every student? As I observe teachers I would be looking for multiple ways that students are experiencing success. I would also pay attention to the individual growth of each student, which could be hard if you are only in the classroom for short periods of time. I think that some success may not be able to be seen but you will have to collect student work samples and have discussions with the teacher to determine how they are measuring success.

I think it can be helpful during the evaluation process to discuss how teachers know that students are experiencing success? I liked the term “overlappingness” that this chapter mentioned. Effective teachers can collect data while, teaching, giving directions, and managing the classroom all at the same time. Through observation and evaluation, evaluators can have conversations with teachers about ways to collect data in nontraditional ways. I think it is important to remember that success is not measured only be tests but it may be formative assessments, observations or even conversations that teachers have with students.

Laughlin: I too was surprised at the 95% success rate statement. I have very similar questions as Dani and Katie as to what does this really look like, how can this be determined exactly? Wouldn't this be different for each student, depending on independently what they were expected to do? Is this success rate based on expectations the teachers have given to students, what if those expectations are low and students have 95% success rate with those expectations, is that really success? I feel it would be beneficial to have a conversation with the staff as to what does 95% success rate mean to them to make sure everyone is on the same page and have the same understanding as to what this means exactly. I think it would bring up some very heated discussions amongst teachers and grade levels, in determining what this means. What if you identify a student who is not having 95% success rate on any given day? Does this reflect on the teacher alone, I would think not, but to mean it would require some investigation with the student and teacher as to why. After rereading my post this really has brought up many questions for me and really what does this 95% success rate mean to myself as well as to a principal.

// Sherri Peterson- When I read this I really was confused! What does "a 95% success rate" mean? Does it mean that the student is learning 95% of the material? Does it mean that the student is engaged 95% of the time? Very confusing and I am not sure that I agree that time spent does not count as academic learning time unless the student has a 95% success rate. If this is true then I have not always been a successful teacher. In my many years as an early childhood special education teacher I had many young students who spent the first year just learning how to be in school. Academic learning if the author means "readin', writin', and 'rithmetic," then I am sure I was not successful according to McEwan. I am thinking right now about a three year old I had in my class who needed three adults just to sit at group time. Would you say that he had a 95% success rate when he could sit at group for 3 minutes without my legs wrapped around him? This will take a little pondering. // // As an evaluator, I would be looking at student engagement when I observe in a classroom. Assessment of student learning will also be a very important indicator that there is academic success in the classroom. I agree with Katie that this would be a great conversation to have with the teacher during the pre-observation conference and again during the post-observation conference. Doing frequent walk-throughs will also give the evaluator valuable information about how the teacher engages students during teacher-directed instruction, group work, center time, and small group instruction. Is the teacher able to engage students during different types of teacher-student interactions or is this particular teacher most successful during a particular part of the day? It would also be informative to observe during different content areas to see if the teacher is as engaging during math as he is during literacy or social studies. All of these observation opportunities would inform the evaluator in a different way about the effectiveness of a teacher. //

Christine Jacobs- In this chapter, I gather that the author, Ms. McEwan, equates a 95% success rate to an individualized matched curriculum. In this case, it really won't increase growth for a student if the time spent on instruction is above or below their level of reading and/or if the objective (in this scenario) is to increase literacy scores. Likewise, she mentions on page 57, that if Jason spends over 20 minutes silently reading a book, he may not be sufficiently engaged, and may not be decoding and understanding WHAT he is reading. This naturally must be recognized as questionable instruction (or lack their of) if he then goes on to LEARNING CENTERS that involve cutting, pasting, etc. and again NO OBJECTIVE is met for reading comprehension, decoding, etc. An effective teacher will utilize the 2 hr. block to make sure that literacy skills are constantly built upon. There will be plenty of time for teacher-student interaction. Students will be engaged and will be taught to keep using decoding strategies, etc. Assessments will be made daily (some will be formative, some summative). Finally, on page 58, "Highly skilled teachers are masters at determining exactly what instructional activities their students need to help them be successfully engaged in learning..." When I observe teachers, I think it is important to always ask the questions, "What are the learning objectives?" "What do you hope for the student(s) to accomplish?" "How will you know that there is learning going on?" I think keeping these questions at the forefront of observations will help keep the success rate where it needs to be. I am not really surprised at the needed success rate. Effective teachers will be effective communicators, and have high expectations of students to keep them engaged and targeted goals will be attained by effective instruction and appropriate assessment(s).

As an evaluator I believe this makes the pre observation documentation, lesson plan, and post observation conference very important. Due to a variety of learner needs this may look different from student to student. A teacher would need to explain to someone coming in to observe what the goals are for each student or groups of students. To me this is about the teacher really knowing the learners, their instructional levels and their readiness for the task at hand. This would be professional learning many teachers would need at the secondary level, it does not look like the entire class doing the same "activity" or assignment, it is true differentated instruction. I agree with this statement, because if students are not engaged in learning they can understand they really are not learning. (Pugh)

When I put the 95% success rate into the context in the book, I came away reading this that the first grade student was engaged in independent reading. From known research, a student is considered independent at reading during this age range (assuming he is a grade level reader) when they can read text with 95% accuracy. As students get older, we want them to read text accurately at 98%. At Linn-Mar, we consider independent level reading 96-110% accuracy, 91-95% is instructional level meaning they need someone to guide them through the text, and 90% and below is frustrational text so they should not be engaging in this text yet. So let me know go back to this text. The student is reading independently and to do so the book the student has should be at a level where the student reads 95% accuracy or greater. Now as a principal when I am observing a teacher and I notice students reading independently, you can easily check this by sitting down next to them and asking them to read out loud to you. Keep track of the numbers misread and where the student starts and stops. Then you can easily calculate the students accuracy. Again, the goal is to be above 95%. I firmly agree with this statement, especially for young readers or struggling readers. If you put a book in a student’s hands that is too difficult, they are practice words incorrectly. You are also frustrating them with reading and can easily and quickly turn them off. (Breitfelder)

Bagnall: When I read the statement I thought of two things: 1) 95% success rate according to what measurement-is it successfully meeting the teacher's desired objectives or is it learning state mandated criteria, or is it just the students actively engaged in the lesson and that is what makes the time successful, and 2) I think the point being made is that the actual amount of time the student is engaged in academic learning time is very brief. We need to be more cognitive of how we allocate our time. As I look at teachers I look at the time they use for directions and the time they set aside for interaction, in those areas I think effective and noneffective teachers can be separated. I don't agree with the statement that the student is experiencing academic learning when he is 95% successful, I've learned a great deal in activities I was far from 95% successful--what about zone of proximal development, aren't we supposed to push our students past the point of success to challenge them?

Maier: “Success” in this statement almost seems like the word “rigor” that we have talked about so much in class; a largely undefined and controversial word. As others have stated, what is it, what does it look like, how do we know it’s happening? This statement actually makes me think about the IPI (Instructional Practices Inventory) process that my building just started. The whole purpose of the IPI is to look at student engagement. Our staff has enjoyed the information they have learned, but some have questioned the importance of doing the IPI. I think sharing this piece of information with them may help them to understand just how important it is to have us looking at student engagement in our building. 95% is a huge number that almost seems intimidating when I think of the make up of my classroom and all of the things we have to get through throughout a day and the whole school year.

As for the implications as an administrator doing observations, I think that I need to keep this statement in the back of my head and be sure to not only watch the teacher and their engagement with the students, but also the students reactions to what the teacher is doing. If a concern arises then an open up discussion about success needs to happen. The discussion should center around what it looks like in their classroom and what is the teacher doing to facilitate success for each student. I actually think this would be an interesting conversation to have with each teacher before entering their classroom.

J. Schutte: I struggle with the idea of a 95 % success rate. How do we know tht they are 95 % successful? With the discussion of time spent as it counts toward academic learning time, I as a teacher feel there is research out there that says independent reading is engaged student time which is important when looking at the allocated learning time and academic learning time. As an administrator I would look for a balance of direct instruction or input from the teacher, as opposed to time doing independent assignments or group activities. Classrooms today are supposed to be more student-centered. A highly effective teacher engages their students in a way that fits the objective being taught. I think success should be measured by the growth over time of a student, the amount of student engagement, and the delivery of instruction based on the objective. As an administrator, I would be looking mainly at those three things during observations.

(Daters) I like many others was surprised when I first read this BUT after much thought and rethinking through the chapter, I don't think that 95% is such a difficult accomplishment if teachers truly analyze their teaching the way they should. To me, all that means is that teachers should be teaching to students at their current learning level. It is another way of say that 95% of instruction needs to be differentiated. Luckily for me, I teach first grade and I have an awesome team that believes in differentiation as much as I do so creating that environment where students have a 95% success rate is not nearly as difficult as I am sure it is in like a high school science or math class. As a principal, I think it will be important to step back and put myself in the place of the teacher. Ask myself, is 95% truly achievable for this teacher in the grade level they teach and the discipline they teach? Also, this is one of those times that I think principals need to look to see if there staff has enough professional development to be able to implement such high success rates and if not, then support them in their journey to reach that goal.

(Moran) Reading through this chapter, I found it difficult to understand what the author meant by 95%. I would totally agree with Brent when he said he was confused about what the author meant: Does 95% mean the success rate of learning the objectives? The % amount of time students were engaged in each category of "with-it-ness?" or even standardized tests? Either way, I think the author left out the variable that each student learns at different rates (when mentioning this particular section). This comment does make me think however about how classroom time should be used and it may make the case for "flipping" a classroom where content is acquired at home and the "practice" happens in the classroom. It also made me think about a teacher's attentiveness in the classroom. Is this something that can be built on? If so, to what extent? If not, is it innate?

As a special education teacher I take this as a slap in the face because none of my students experience a 95% success rate in terms of tests that matter. However, I know for a fact that I have students learning in my classroom on a daily basis. Just because a student struggles with a specific skills area does not mean they are not learning. As a matter of fact, some of our best learning as human beings is from failure. Now, when examing the learning in the classroom, it is essential for students to have mastered a skill before building on it to teach the next topic. Does this mean that the students is not learning? I believe this is as far from the truth as possible. Student learning can be seen even if students are not achieving a 95% proficiency rate. If this statement is true, then why not change the proficiency rate of standardized tests to 95% instead of 41. (Zabel)

Jordan Henrichs: I guess, like Leisa, I looked at this in the context of reading. The author makes this claim when closing out the paragraph about Jason, the first-grader. The author references Jason's teacher and the amount of different variables that Jason's teacher needed to consider when supplying Jason with //reading// material. Even after the first paragraph, the author follows Jason through multiple reading "centers" in the next paragraph and references the "reading objective." I felt that "success rate" was in reference to his //reading// "success rate." I'm not sure the quote was ever intended to be applied to //all// subjects, out of context. . . Those of us in the elementary world are surely familiar with running records and reading tests like the Basic Reading Inventory (BRI) or the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA). The word accuracy success rate goal for students on these types of assessments is 95% or higher. In the context of reading, which I believe the author intended, this actually makes sense to me.

The premise is that if Jason spent less than 95% of his time sounding out words, or skimming over words he did not know the meaning for, true academic learning wouldn't take place. He wouldn't be able to comprehend what he was reading because he was exerting too much energy trying to physically //read// it! Therefore, to learn from his reading, to comprehend his reading, to become more fluent (fluency has strong ties to reading comprehension), Jason needs to be reading independently at a 95% success rate (word accuracy) or better. I tend to agree with this.

I do not think the author intended for the "95%" comment to be applied to all subject areas. Within the hypothetical example they were using about Jason in the first grade classroom, the figure was in reference to Jason's reading success rate. Nothing more. It does lead to some interesting thinking though. . . for example, if research has proven that a child cannot learn from their text until they are reading it with a 95% success rate, what does this tell us about "learning" altogether? How does this apply to math? And other subject areas?

Emilie: In reflecting on this statement it is difficult for me to understand what he means. If students are progressing then time does count as academic learning time. It also makes me think that I think this puts a lot of pressure on the individual teacher rather than the learning community. When students struggle to understand certain content they need to be provided with additional learning opportunities. Ideally this is provided through the school scheduling system, offering targeted and intensive instruction. This should be a flexible system where students move in and out of these levels of supports, with the goal of all students experiencing 80-100% success.

Sunni Hart-I would say I have mixed feelings about this statement. When looking at this statement alone, I would definantly disagree because some of our best learning occurs when we fail, when we struggle, when our thinking is challenged. If I am always functioning at a 95% success rate then I would have to question the tasks that I am being asked to do, are they challenging my thinking enough, are they requiring me to think, do Ihave to analyze, do I have to apply some skill that I have been taught. Academic learning is occuring a lot more than just at a 95% success rate. As I think about the example that the author gives in our text it forces me to think about what the teacher has set up during that 2 hour reading block of time. If all the teacher has asked the student to do is read silently for 20 minutes, then success rate would be questioned. However, if during those 20 minutes of reading the student needs to think about a specific topic, like how the character has changed or 2 facts that were learned or 2 questions that came to mind while reading, and then be prepared to share those out at the end of the reading block, during classroom discussion, then the teacher has just raised the bar of success rate by adding accountability. We learn so much by doing, failing, thinking, and then doing again, we need to remember that when we think about how often we are observing teachers.

While I think the statement is a little bit extreme it shouldn't steer us away from this as a goal. Every business, group, school had the goal of reaching outcome. Or goals a based around student engagement, and more importantly student understanding. However, this statement leaves me with more questions than anything else. What do we consider to be success. The success of the the academic standards are at a percentage range - but does that mean that we only push students to that spot? Furthermore, what should we think about the inevitable student with documentation who may struggle to reach any benchmark that is set for him/her. My point is that the blanket statement of 95% success should have far more reaching variables to it. Though it is easy to state - it is immensely difficult to gauge. As an evaluator there must be far more to a thought than just a number. We must be constantly think about the differentiation of education to fit the needs of the diverse student body that we are sure to have. If we do not we are no better than the thought of trying to shove a square into a circular hole. (Einsweiler)

Cassandra Hart: I agree with Schutte, Daters and others. How do we define 95% success rate? What will my child be required to accomplish this year? What will my objective be in getting him there? Teachers and parents want their children to succeed. Students learn in different way and some may need to have accommodations. Knowing this allows the teacher to plan instructional activities to ensure that they meet their goals. Each learning environment can look different in each classroom. When I do walk through, I look at student engagement. Focusing on the growth of a student will be an indicator that there is academic success in the classroom. This would be a good topic to discuss at a PD to define what 95% success rate means to make sure everyone is on the same page,